Microsoft Azure Object Storage Reviews

The main use case that I have in my company is to store some scanned documents from our customers.

The most valuable feature of the solution is the tool's price since it is not expensive. The tools that support using Azure Blob Storage, like the open source storage accounts like Azure Storage Explorer, are really easy to use and user-friendly. When it comes to life cycle management, you have many pricing tiers associated with storage costs. You can use policies to change between the pricing tires, and it is really easy to use the policies.

For me, there are many things that are only possible to be used in the CLI for easy copying. I think if the tool puts features that only exist in the easy copying area through Azure Storage Explorer, so introducing such features in Microsoft Azure Object Storage can make it more user-friendly.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Object Storage for five or six years. I am a customer of the solution.

I didn't have any problems, so I didn't use the tool's technical support. I found everything that I needed on the internet or using the CLI, so I never had to use the tools' support. I rate the tool a six out of ten.

Neutral

I have only used Microsoft Azure Object Storage.

The product's initial setup phase is straightforward, but if you don't pay attention, you will have to delete and create another storage because some options cannot be changed.

The product's deployment phase is easy.

The solution can be deployed in a couple of minutes.

For any kind of cloud provider, when you use the correct tools instead of just putting virtual machines inside the cloud, you will always have a good return on investment. I don't see Azure to be very different from AWS.

I didn't have any problem with the tool's durability, so I guess it is okay. We have used it for many years, and there hasn't been a single case of missing documents, as it always works perfectly.

Azure Data Lake Storage Gen2 is a tool my company started to use with Azure Databricks, and it has been a good experience till now. When it comes to pricing, Azure Databricks uses a large amount of data, and the price is okay even with a lot of data to manage.

Microsoft, in general, is complicated because there are some tools that we have great support for, and there are some tools that you simply don't. For example, I worked with an application gateway, and the support wasn't great. There are lots of people working with me. When there were some issues in the application gateway, we had to figure it out for ourselves, and the the support wasn't able to help us. There are other tools for which the support is good.

Speaking about AI and Microsoft Azure Object Storage, Azure Data Lake Storage Gen2 helps us to update Azure Data Lake Storage sources, and when you enable the option in the storage account, you can connect a lot of tools, like Azure Databricks or Azure Machine Learning Studio, so you can use them as a source of data for your models. The tool helps us since it is easy to use. The tool is pretty straightforward. You don't have to think about the tool, as it just works fine.

I recommend the tool to others.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

I worked in Azure Cloud mostly on the Databricks side, with SQL Server or Synapse Analytics, or streaming analytics. It's a blob storage solution. We use the storage account, either the blob storage or the ADLS Gen 2.

We can do data queries easily. If it's a JSON document or XML document, mostly we deliver the APIs, calls, and all. The document is stored as an object stored in the Blob Storage. Then, using the Databricks, we try to process that JSON and then load it into a Delta Lake table. That is where we interact mostly with Object Storage.

The initial setup is straightforward. 

If we look at the different versions of that ADLS, it really does not have a hierarchical storage mechanism. If you want to store any document, you have to go and create one blob storage account, in case you want to store any hierarchical data. 

The solution is stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

It's all scalable. It has lifecycle management where I can define a rule so that I can easily archive or move the data from the cool tier to the hot tier based on the uses and then I can also send it into the cool tier so that it can be frequently accessed. If I do that, the cost can also be minimized.

Technical support is great. We have a partnership basically with Microsoft. For my organization, Microsoft is the partner vendor. Whenever it is required, support is readily available to us.

Positive

I'm also familiar with Amazon S3. 

The initial setup is straightforward. You just have to create a storage account. You can automate that also. You have different mechanisms. You can use Azure templates, like SQL, or you can use the Terraform as well. To automate the creation of that object storage or any account. Or, if you have different APIs, like Python-based API, you can easily create what you need.

If we compare most of the other cloud vendor solutions, for example, S3 Object, S3 with the Blob Storage, more or less, both have the same capabilities. However, from a security perspective, Azure is very good. Azure offers AD integration with the storage account. That is something I find as a good feature compared to the other clouds and integration with all the Azure services is a really useful feature.

We're a gold partner with Microsoft.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten due to the ADLS integration and the different authentication mechanisms that we have.

We need to make sure that the data which we are storing in those storage objects is highly secured. That is where Azure is providing us with the best features. We can go with the different mechanisms like its Nexus security or the AD authentication. Or, they also provide us admin encryption, including the transparent keys. With transparent encryption, we can encrypt based on customer-based keys. Those are also some good features that make it a really great product.

I think it is not an improvement from the tool, but we were able to arrange our layers on the data lake using objects and a best practice for speeding them up or for making partitions in objects to protect against security vulnerabilities and increase the performance of data access. I don't think there are improvements in our company from the use of the tool. It is just the best practice that we are using in our company.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage makes some valuable compliance certifications for healthcare, and we need to obey the compliance part. In the healthcare sector, we have HIPAA, and in Brazil, we have LDPD compliance, which is similar to GDPR compliance. When we have to make proof of data access, proof of deletion, or datasheet reading, we can do it all easily with Azure.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is like other cloud providers. It is just a simple object storage and the first kind of cloud product in the market. Amazon started off with S3, but our company didn't see any advantages against other competitors with the product specifically.

I believe AI will be available in the tool, but we don't know whether such a feature exists. We didn't use AI in our case to see if our team and our customers would see the difference during deployment.

The tool doesn't offer Microsoft Copilot and Microsoft AI. It would be great to see Microsoft Copilot and Microsoft AI in Microsoft Azure Object Storage. When you speak about Microsoft Azure Object Storage is a new kind of database. You have the better parts from two worlds, which are the vector and index features, and you can use them for your products without any migration or any other condition. It will be good to be tested.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Object Storage for three years. My company develops solutions, so I am a Microsoft customer.

The scalability of the tool has no limits.

Considering that we have many direct and indirect users, I would say there are 100 users.

In the future, we want to multiply the number of users of the tool by ten times.

For my team, the first level of support from the tool could be better. For the technical account, the tool's consultants are very good as they bring in some of the best practices into our company, and so we have the solution's validated design. I think the type of support depends on the customer, but for our use case, we try to follow all the product's recommendations. I rate the technical support a six to seven out of ten.

Neutral

I use Azure Service Fabric, some storage pools, and all things related to Microsoft.

The product's initial setup phase is similar to the processes required to follow for other tools in the market. I think Azure's initial setup phase is harder than Amazon or GCP.

The product's installation phase has some limitations. I have to set up more parameters on Azure than other tools. I had some issues with the tool's setup phase.

Most of the time, when we deploy the tool on a complete rack and stack, we write every line in Terraform. I think every time you need to deploy the tool, the first time, you have to keep it totally focused, so it is a manual process.

The solution is deployed using a public cloud. We may change our model to a multi-cloud one, but it is not like a hybrid model.

I think the ROI depends on the product. When it comes to Microsoft Azure Object Storage, it doesn't deliver entire value to our customers. The product made is totally fit, but for the market, I think we are not able to get hold of the market fit.

The price will be more competitive when we increase the time spent using the tool. For our company's size range, I think the price is okay.

The tool's maintenance is not complex. We have deployed an observability platform on Microsoft Azure Object Storage, and all the parameters in our dashboards are not complex.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

We use Microsoft Azure Object Storage for backups, archiving, and SFTP storage.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is an easy-to-use and stable solution.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is a pretty expensive solution. The cost management part is a little complex, and if we don't configure it right, it can be pretty expensive.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Object Storage for a few years.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is a stable solution.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage is a scalable solution. Around 200 users are using the solution in our organization, and we have plans to increase the usage.

The solution’s technical support should be improved.

We have previously used different solutions. We switched to Microsoft Azure Object Storage because most of our landscape is on Azure, and it's easier to have everything in one place than using a different vendor. So, it's convenient for us.

The solution's initial setup is straightforward.

We implemented the solution through an in-house team. The solution can be deployed in one or two weeks.

The solution's cost is on a pay-per-use basis.

I would recommend Microsoft Azure Object Storage to other users.

Overall, I rate Microsoft Azure Object Storage an eight out of ten.

The storage account is one of the primary components in all implementations, including cloud implementations. It is a common resource in Azure.

We mostly work with Blob Storage, and it is a very good resource for unstructured storage. Blob Storage is one of the best resources in Azure for storing unstructured data such as files, video files, audio files, and Excel files. Currently, Blob Storage is the cheapest and best solution, with very good features for unstructured data.

One of the things that are currently important is consistency. To achieve this, another database called Cosmos DB is available. We want to have a similar consistency to the one in Cosmos DB but at a cheaper price. Although Cosmos DB is known to be expensive, it has a guaranteed consistency level of 99.99%. I want Microsoft to explore how they can provide the same consistency level as Cosmos DB but at a lower cost. Speaking of consistency, we are currently using GRS or GZRS as our storage redundancy types. It would be great if we could achieve the same guaranteed consistency level as with Cosmos DB. It would be of great use if we could apply the same approach to our storage account.

Currently, I do not have any suggestions regarding Blob Storage. The storage account allows for storing VHD, which is a type of blob, along with other blob types, such as append blobs and page blobs. These blob types are already well-matured designs, and I don't have any suggestions. The storage account also offers different tiers, such as cool, hot, and archive tiers, as per the access. These features meet the needs of data and application engineers for storing data. Mostly, it has all the features to meet the current requirements, and it is one of the well-designed resources from Microsoft.

I work with an Azure storage account that includes a blob bin and file storage. I have used Azure Blob Storage for almost five years. Also, I am not sure if we are partners with Microsoft since I joined a month ago.

For stability, I rate it a nine out of ten. This is because it offers one of the best features. Also, I have not faced any complaints regarding the storage account in my five years of experience. There might be other resources I feel that I couldn't access or have some service-related issues. But, I didn't face any issues with the storage account.

I rate the solution nine out of ten in terms of its ability to scale. Since it is a management service, we should not bother about scaling. This is because we have a very good scaling policy for management services. As I recently joined the organization, I am not aware of how many employees are currently using this solution.

The technical support you receive depends on the plan you choose, whether it is the basic plan, standard plan, or premium plan. In my current organization, we have a premium plan for which the technical support is awesome. I raised three tickets with the technical support team while using the premium plan and received the best support from Microsoft. So, I rate the technical support a ten out of ten.

Positive

I am working with AWS, Azure, and GCP, but my major contribution to the cloud is towards Azure.

It is a very simple process.

Currently, it is a flexible price policy.

Amazon S3 is equivalent to Azure Storage accounts, as they offer almost the same features. Based on my experience, I find Azure to be a more comfortable tool to work with compared to Amazon S3. The UI is better designed, and I could easily understand the features and other things. Therefore, even though the two solutions are similar, I rate the storage account solution higher than Amazon S3.

It is one of the best features or resources, especially for people who want to use Blob Storage for unstructured data. For us, it is a very cost-effective resource since we can understand it easily. I haven't experienced any issues with this solution for the past five to six years. I rate this solution a nine out of ten.

The solution can be used to share files and folders.

The product has good accessibility.

The stability could be improved.

I have been using the solution for two years.

The tool is stable. I rate the stability an eight and a half out of ten.

The tool is scalable. I rate the scalability an eight and a half out of ten. Around 100 technical support team members, including support engineers, support analysts, and service delivery managers, use the solution in our organization.

I have contacted the support team for a couple of issues. The team is knowledgeable.

We were using the on-premise solution NAS provided by Dell.

The setup is straightforward.

The tool is worth the money.

The solution is expensive. However, we can choose to get a budget-friendly license. The vendor should offer extensions on the licenses. People are still working on on-premise servers. If we want them to move to the cloud, the vendors must provide competitive prices. We have a couple of small to medium businesses. The solution is not affordable for small businesses.

The vendor must provide more information on how the tool helps users. Many of our clients do not know the solutions provided by the vendor. Though the information is available on the website, most customers do not understand the technical aspects. A better way to explain the tool's uses would be through pictures. Overall, I rate the product an eight and a half out of ten.

Microsoft Azure Object Storage offers hassle-free usage. It is easy to configure. 

The product is expensive.

I have been working with the solution for a year. 

I rate the solution's stability a nine out of ten. 

I rate the tool's scalability a nine out of ten. My company has more than 100 users who use it 24/7.  

Microsoft support's turnaround time is high, and its documentation is good. Sometimes, the person who is assigned a ticket is not an expert. 

Neutral

I rate the product's setup a nine out of ten. The deployment team had around 20 members. 

Encryption feature is an add-on. 

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

We use this solution to store images and Excel files.

We used to use an on premise file system and the maintenance of on a premise server is difficult. This is why we migrated to Azure storage. Using this solution has reduced our maintenance time and cost. 

The file retention and object retention have been most valuable.

Uploading files from the UI has presented some issues. When editing work and once you delete a file, it takes some time to recreate the same file. If I have an ABC file and if I delete it and I want to recreate the file again with the same name, it is not immediate. There is at a least 30 seconds or one-minute delay.

We have been using this solution for three years.

This is a stable solution. 

This is a scalable solution. We have specifically configured it for scalability. 

We have reached out for technical support but not directly related to Azure Storage. We had a Logic app and we tried to connect it to Azure Storage. They provided a solution but it was not a limitation of Azure Storage and rather a limitation of the Logic app.

I would rate the support for this solution a nine out of ten. 

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward. We had no issues with the deployment because we used GitHub Action, Azure DevOps, terraforms as well as AMS scripts to build and deploy. Deployment did not take more than a minute.

We have used a pricing calculator to find out the general pricing for our clients. 

I would recommend this solution to those who already have an on-premise file system and who want to migrate to a cloud-native solution. This solution offers scalability at a lower cost and additional benefits compared with an on-premise file server.